A Working Terminology for Minimal Music by Dan Warburton Minimal music has come of age: it is now nearly a quarter of a century since Terry Riley assembled an ad hoc group of friends to perform what on paper looked a modest little composition entitled HIn C," and some twenty years have passed since the Reich and Glass ensembles played to single-figure audiences of artists in draughty New York lofts. By what seems to have been a shrewd marketing strategy, Philip Glass has now succeeded in capturing the attention, prestige, and wealth of the operatic community on both sides of the Atlantic (and is being closely followed it seems by John Adams), while Steve Reich has been rediscovering and redefining the potential of the symphony orchestra. Add to this the enormous demand for recordings of minimal music (thanks in no small part to the efforts of prominent 1970s rock musicians like Eno and Bowie in demonstrating its "crossover potential"), and it is easy to see why the more reticent "uptown" community of academics and old-style avant- garde composers have tended to view this music with mild disdain (tinged with a little jealousy?) bordering on polite contempt. For their part, the minimalists have shown little interest in wooing this more exclusive market-unlike as was the case with the Darmstadt avant-garde, the emergence of minimal music was not accompanied by a flood of polemical rhetoric- and the academics This content downloaded from 128.151.124.135 on Sat, 16 Mar 2019 00:24:15 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 136 Integral have accordingly given them little analytical attention. With the possible exception of Reich's "Writings,*1 and specifically "Music as a Gradual Process" (which is more philosophical credo than music theory anyway), there were only sporadic attempts to introduce the new techniques of minimalism to an educated musical public prior to Michael Nyman's chapter on the subject in "Experimental Music: Cage and Beyond." Quite simply, there would have been no point- it was a characteristic of early minimal compositions that their overall form and moment-to-moment content were one and the same thing: the process. Only with the introduction of established harmonic procedures (chord sequences, cadential progressions) in the mid-1970s did it become possible to make such distinctions once more. By that time, though, Glass had already signed with Virgin Records to record "Music in Twelve Parts," and the ever-voracious rock press had "discovered" minimal music. The handful of academics who had shown interest beat a hasty retreat- paradoxically, at the moment it became more open to conventional analysis, the more the music was ignored. Recently, however, there has been a resurgence of interest in the subject, which seems to be the result of a number of factors. Firstly, minimal music has become more openly conventional, i.e., it has actively sought to reclaim harmonic and contrapuntal procedures more commonly associated with Western music. To this end, it seems to have attracted composers as diverse in aesthetic as Ligeti, Andriessen, Part and Tavener, who have each brought more "classical" (or classically avant-garde) concepts of organization into "Writings About Music" (London: Universal Edition, 1975): 9-11. "Experimental Music: Cage and Beyond" (London: Studio Vista, 1974). This content downloaded from 128.151.124.135 on Sat, 16 Mar 2019 00:24:15 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 137 the minimalist field. Secondly, the kind of analysis of mainstream twentieth-century music that was fashionable some ten or so years ago now seems rather primitive in the light of the formalized refinement and somewhat forbidding elegance of recent set theory. Accordingly, some students may have turned to minimal music thinking that it presents less of a problem in terms of terminology- this however is not the case. The aim of this paper is to explain the confusion that has arisen within the vocabulary of minimal music, and hopefully to dispel it by presenting a more precise terminology suitable to the analytical requirements of future students. Before embarking on this, however, certain questions have to be asked regarding the nature of their proposed analyses. Music analysis, especially in America, where Schenkerian and set-theoretical disciplines have become integral components of university curricula, is generally predicated on the concept that a composition can be analyzed to reveal various hierarchical levels of structure, and that events on the surface of the music can be deemed to be more or less valuable in terms of their relationships to the structural hierarchy. To this end, a Schenker graph and a Forte K/Kh lattice diagram serve the same purpose (admittedly this is a drastic oversimplification of the issues involved), both providing an out-of-time representational model of the music's structure. With minimalism, such an approach is of little value, as it fails to take into account the in-time listening experience, i.e., the specific location of events and the durations of sections in relation to the musical material they contain, or to the proportions of the work as a whole. This is not to say that an analysis of a minimalist composition should resemble a recipe book (ingredients and cooking times) but rather This content downloaded from 128.151.124.135 on Sat, 16 Mar 2019 00:24:15 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 138 Integral that the process by which events are taken from the musical surface and presented out of context should be less oriented towards an underlying deep structure and more concerned with how the selected material unfolds during the course of a performance. With Schenkerian or set theory it is quite possible-though hardly desirable, one would think- to produce a successful analysis of a work without having heard it; in an analysis of a minimalist composition, events are deemed to be significant because they are heard to be significant, and not the other way around. Given a music as consciously "self-explanatory" as minimalism, it is up to the student to determine to what extent his/her observations will remain merely descriptions-it is hoped that the following will be of use and will be adapted to their particular demands. Reference is made in the text to the author's article on Steve Reich's "Sextet, and musical examples are taken from that work with the kind permission of the composer. As a composer and writer working in this general area one is constantly frustrated at having to preface the term "minimalism" with "so-called"-it seems to be a name-tag that has no existence outside of quotation marks, and all minimalist composers are acutely conscious of its potentially misleading and even pejorative implications. Minimal music (for the time being we shall continue to be published to coincide with the eventual appearance of the engraved score (no details at time of going to press). Apart from the many published interviews with these composers, my personal encounters with four minimalists confirm their unease with the label. Michael Nyman continues to use the "so-called"; Louis Andriessen described his "Hoketus" (1977) most emphatically as "MAXIMAL music-I am a maximalist!"; Glass was uneasy at the mention of the word after "Akhnaten" received its world premiere in 1984; Reich's own comment appears in the text above. This content downloaded from 128.151.124.135 on Sat, 16 Mar 2019 00:24:15 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 139 to use the term as fearlessly as possible) has been variously described as "trance music," "systems music," "process music," 7 8 "solid state music," "repetitive music" and "structuralist music. Before discussing more systematic and specific terms, these generic labels need to be dealt with. Both "systems music" and "process music" are generally quite useful as descriptions; we propose to differentiate between the two, preferring the "process" term as being more applicable to the early works of the genre, where the compositions are structurally nothing more than single processes. Terry Riley described "In C" as a "people process, and in terms of the general definitions proposed by Reich in his "Music as a Gradual Process,"10 both his (Reich's) and Glass's works of the late 1960s and early 1970s are justifiably described as processes in their own right. (The list also includes the works of Frederic Rzewski from about this time: "Les Moutons de Panurge"; "Attica"; and "Coming Together.") "Systems music" we take to encompass more than one single linear process, and under this label we propose to include This is still popular in Europe, though more recently records of minimal music are also appearing in "New Age" bins in major record stores. Originally used in connection with Nyman's music, this is currently in vogue with the British rock press. This seems to appear first in the "Village Voice" shortly after the U.S. premiere run of "Einstein on the Beach." Nyman has collaborated extensively with self-styled "structuralist filmmaker" Peter Greenaway, the term appears with reference to minimal music after the widespread success of "The Draughtsman's Contract" in 1983. u Riley, as cited by Nyman in "Experimental Music* (note 2, above). "I do not mean the process of composition, but rather pieces of music that are, literally, processes. "The distinctive thing about musical processes is that they determine all the note-to-note (sound-to-sound) details and the overall form simultaneously. (Think of a round or infinite canon.)" From "Music as a Gradual Process" (1968), in "Writings* (see note 1, above).